That and a Ricoh GR with the 21mm modifier. These are more shots with the 20mm Hugo Meyer. I have been intending to learn Photoshop but it is a daunting project.
I will have to look into the Topaz Filters. But am uncertain if it is more a question of the browns in the subject. Is the 1.9 different, do you think? How would you describe its quality and rendering? If any light enters the lens directly the image gets immediately blown out. In my style of shooting (which is street shooting mostly) I find that it doesn't work so well in strongly lighted situation. Have you used the Dallmeyer Speed Anstigmat? I have it and like it, but I find that it is a soft and 'dream' sort of lens. LyleBright wrote: Curious about the Dallmeyer Super Six 25mm f1.9. Here are two from a Zoomar Zoomatar 75mm f1.3, then two from an Elgeet Cine Navitar 50mm f1.5, followed by two from a Dallmeyer Super Six 25mm f1.9, followed by two from a Ross 1 inch f1.9 That being said, I do have some very nice C-mount lenses. For most of my "normal" shooting I use modern lenses. I don't personally like using vintage lenses for general street photography, because I am not a fan of blurry corners and heavy vignetting. The main thing I do is to look for images that accentuate the inherent bokeh qualities of the lenses. I do slight sharpening and microcontrast adjustments using Topaz filters in Photoshop. Kymarto wrote: I don't actually do that much tweaking. In fact, getting involved in digital is really quite new as I had always worked in film and only in B&W. To what degree do you tweak the image to arrive at those particular bokeh qualities? Myself, I only use LightRoom and my knowledge of manipulating digital images is limited. I think I responded to one asking some questions. I bought my HM 20mm at somewhat of a discount and sent it in for CLA not knowing what to expect.
I have a HM 25mm 1.5 and it too is a lovely lens, but for the sort of work I do - street stuff almost exclusively - I really like using a 20mm lens. I generally shoot 1:1 but have done a good deal or testing at 4:3 (On my late model Olympus 4/3 body). One thing about it is that it hardly vignettes at all, even when shooting 4:3 And as you say it tends to distort in the outer areas but very differently - less outrageously I would say - than the Cooke Kinic. I wanted to quickly mention - I imagine this will interest you - that the HM 20mm lens has become, for the time being, my favorite lens. I never got a notification that there had been a response. I imagine the 20mm would have a more limited image circle. I really love this lens and will post samples below. In addition the swirly part does not degenerate into mush as it does with the Cooke. It does swirl, but not as drastically as the Cooke Kinic (and with a much larger image frame). The 25mm has surprising coverage, filling the APS-C frame at close focusing distances. The 15 has a very limited image circle, and so I don't use it much. They have pretty unique bokeh characteristics.
Rudolph, and were the fastest lenses available at the time at f1.5. Kymarto wrote: The Hugo Meyer Kino Plasmats were, I believe, developed in the 1920s by Dr. I include here a shot of mine to indicate the sort of shooting I do.
If you have any images, please do post them! I like the 20mm on my four thirds format camera. I would be very thankful if you would offer some words about Hugo Meyer lenses generally, and about this 20mm specifically. But when I was directed to my Cooke Kinic 1.5 25mm and the Dallmeyer Anastigmat 1.5 25mm, those who did so clearly explained what was attractive about its rendering. Often, one can only know a lens by trying it out, this I admit. I recognize that this is, and HM lenses are generally, desirable lenses. I need information on the Hugo-Meyer 20mm f1.5 Kino-Plasmat. I now use Cooke, Dallmeyer, Schneider in the 25mm and a Meopta in 20mm. I am a street shooter, a documentary photographer, and I do like to use Cine lenses. Posted: Wed 2:26 pm Post subject: Hugo-Meyer 20mm (3/4 inch) f1.5 Kino-Plasmat C mount
0 kommentar(er)
